Vet trees

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[nugnugx]

I've made a new thread , seing as it has gained some attention in other thread that is dedicated to vet rework....

Nugx wrote

Had this idea ,  how about having two vet trees ?

If someone didn't want to change his vet , he could just choose 'offensive' or 'defensive' tree for all of his troops , and if someone would want to play with different vet , he could pick every level vet for every troop as he pleases from one of the trees making a mix of vet ,

Like:

  Tiger

vet 1     offensive                 defensive
            100% more dmg            100% more health

vet 2       200% more dmg          200% more health


i can choose offensive vet 1  and then defensive vet 2  and i have 1 offensive and 1 defensive bonus




more randomization options !

Tym wrote

I would love to have vet options like that, it would really make it so you can have different types of companies. depending on how its implemented (only able to go down 1 tree or selectable) you can have up to 9 different combination's of vet.

think of it this way. 3 off, 3 def. 1-2-3 is off and 4-5-6 is def vet.

1
2
3

4
5
6

1
2
6

1
5
3

1
2
6

4
5
3

4
2
6

1
5
6

4
2
3

that'd be quite awesome.

Lionel23 wrote

Well I say definitely let's have something of a discussion on it, I think some vet for units needs to be totally overhauled and others are fine.  In regards to offensive/defensive vet, doesn't sound too bad but what if you want accuracy over damage? I mean damage is nice and all, but some units currently have things like +sticky bomb range or +1 faust, or fire-up/sprint has cooldown, etc.

smurfornot wrote

that would be very nice,like PE has in vanila coh...

[Demon767]

i like this. increase the customisation!

also lets get Avatars of our companies so we choose what we want to look like

[Spartan_Marine88]

Maybe an ability choice

vet 4

Offensive

Focus Fire

Defensive

Suppression Fire

(you get the idea)

[spinn72]

i like this. increase the customisation!

also lets get Avatars of our companies so we choose what we want to look like

More than half the community would have Troll Face!

[TheIcelandicManiac]

that thing would be quite fun too use with the howie, firing nukes around and aint afraid of anything.

[Mysthalin]

More than half the community would have Troll Face!

And the other half would be Trollface with a fancy hat.

[AlterFrax]

I really like this idea! Again, like PE in vanilla CoH.

It would be really cool to increase the customization in this way. You would have to wonder how to approach certain units with vet this way: "hmm, does that tiger have the defensive buffs or offensive buffs?" etc

[Scotzmen]

More customisation? More awesome persistence?

Custom avatars of our units? Trollfaces with troll hats?

I like

Has Alterfrax said, it will add some new flavour of strategy to EIR:R.

Although they will most diffntly have to look at balancing and we turn on our on idea lol

[Illegal_Carrot]

There's been some discussion about this before, and the answer I've been given is that it's too much work for too little payoff. Every different 'tree' of vet you add increase the dev's work exponentially in terms of designing, developing, implementing and balancing.

And unless each vet tree is perfectly balanced, one will always be taken over the other, as it's clearly superior in some way.

[11on2d6]

There's been some discussion about this before, and the answer I've been given is that it's too much work for too little payoff. Every different 'tree' of vet you add increase the dev's work exponentially in terms of designing, developing, implementing and balancing.

And unless each vet tree is perfectly balanced, one will always be taken over the other, as it's clearly superior in some way.

If you make them different enough it wont be a problem, say the OFF bonus is +50% acc and the def bonus is +20% acc/speed.  Those two buffs, while not equal, are totaly different, I could certainly still see myself taking the acc/speed buff depending on the unit and the role I have in mind for it.

[Illegal_Carrot]

If you make them different enough it wont be a problem, say the OFF bonus is +50% acc and the def bonus is +20% acc/speed.  Those two buffs, while not equal, are totaly different, I could certainly still see myself taking the acc/speed buff depending on the unit and the role I have in mind for it.

Each unit would have to be carefully examined and have vet custom tailored to it. Vet would have to be unique (to give a reason for there actually being two separate trees), yet similar enough that their effects and worth are measurable. It's the balancing that would probably be the hardest to deal with.

[Spartan_Marine88]

There's been some discussion about this before, and the answer I've been given is that it's too much work for too little payoff. Every different 'tree' of vet you add increase the dev's work exponentially in terms of designing, developing, implementing and balancing.

And unless each vet tree is perfectly balanced, one will always be taken over the other, as it's clearly superior in some way.

hmm best way would be the Offense/Defense style.

That way i could have various callins of riflemen (for example) but they could be tailored for the type. Both have bars, but the one is clearly better at holding its turf and one at taking it. So if we are being pushed back, its time to call out my Battlefield Anchors.

[Tymathee]

hmm best way would be the Offense/Defense style.

That way i could have various callins of riflemen (for example) but they could be tailored for the type. Both have bars, but the one is clearly better at holding its turf and one at taking it. So if we are being pushed back, its time to call out my Battlefield Anchors.

you have to think of other units as well. 88's, howitzers, mortars, hmgs, etc. If you have artillery, what would you rather have, offensive or defensive bonuses? more than likely if something gets too close to ur howie to attack it, more than likely its going to be dead anyway.

and heck if its too much work i can make up a list. vet imo is pretty easy to input, i just dont know how hard it is to input the PE style vet tho, would love to have a dev come int his thread, surprised we haven't had one comment.

[Illegal_Carrot]

Well, if you were to do multiple vet trees, it wouldn't have to be offensive/defensive. In the case of artillery, it could be damage + range or recharge + rate of fire.

[Tymathee]

Well, if you were to do multiple vet trees, it wouldn't have to be offensive/defensive. In the case of artillery, it could be damage + range or recharge + rate of fire.

mmhmm. lots of different combinations you can use, thats why i love the idea

[nugnugx]

For howie 'offensive' can be for example just as we have now

- barrage on cooldown  ,  shell reload,  range

for 'defensive'

as howie gets artied alot maybe smth like  enemy offmap scatter increased on howie,  enemy onmap arty scatter increased on howie, etc


offensive and defensive does not mean it has to be flat dmg , acc or  health and recieved damage, it can be anything


To have usefull two vet trees the two trees need to be of same strength.
Balancing vet imo would be a less of a hassle than balancing doctrines , because you would only have to balance per the unit itself and not the whole doctrine and all the units and abilities in doctrine.

[Artekas]

It's not possible to give some kind of "increase incoming scatter" buff. Artillery barrages don't target units, they target the ground, and shells fly into the ground and explode, damaging units.

[nugnugx]

Jesus that was an EXAMPLE of what can be (if it would be possible), why do you have to pick on the irrelevant little things always ?

Each unit would have to be carefully examined and have vet custom tailored to it

So units now are not carefully examined and have vet tailored to them ?


You make it sound carrot like it's a work for many years which is not,  one person makes the draft and the 2nd implements and balancing as always would come out in gameplay.
(see shotgun engineers)

[Artekas]

I'm not picking on anything, I was simply stating that it wasn't possible and explained why. Herpderp.

[Illegal_Carrot]

So units now are not carefully examined and have vet tailored to them ?

You make it sound carrot like it's a work for many years which is not,  one person makes the draft and the 2nd implements and balancing as always would come out in gameplay.
(see shotgun engineers)

No, the vet most units have now are just generic vet levels that almost all similar units have. Look at Allied armor: vet is exactly the same between the M10/M18/Sherman/Perhsing/T17/Croc; it's like this for most units.

And if you get a single person to design and develop every single unit's vet, you'll end up with some really terrible ideas (see Shotgun Engineers).